netdev - RE: [RFC PATCH net-next 2/9] net: phy: Guard against the presence of a netdev

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 24 May 2019 13:55:29 +0000
From:   Ioana Ciornei <ioana.ciornei@....com>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
CC:     "linux@...linux.org.uk" <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        "f.fainelli@...il.com" <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        "hkallweit1@...il.com" <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
        "maxime.chevallier@...tlin.com" <maxime.chevallier@...tlin.com>,
        "olteanv@...il.com" <olteanv@...il.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH net-next 2/9] net: phy: Guard against the presence of
 a netdev


> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 2/9] net: phy: Guard against the presence of a
> netdev
> 
> > > Hi Ioana
> > >
> > > Looking at the functions changed here, they seem to be related to
> > > phy_attach(), phy_connect(), and phy_detach() etc. Is the intention
> > > you can call these functions and pass a NULL pointer for the net_device?
> > >
> > > 	Andrew
> >
> > Hi Andrew,
> >
> > Yes, the intention is exactly to pass a NULL pointer for the  net_device from
> PHYLINK.
> > The changes that do this are in "[RFC,net-next,5/9] net: phylink: Add
> phylink_create_raw".
> 
> Hi Ioana
> 
> I think in general, we don't want MAC drivers doing this.
> 

Agreed.

> We should enforce that the general APIs get a netdev. PHYLINK uses
> phy_attach_direct() which is the lowest level of these attach() and
> connect() calls. And there is only one MAC driver using phy_attach_direct(). So
> please add checks for the netdev and return -EINVAL in these higher level callers
> to phy_attach_direct().
> 

Will add the checks in v2.

--
Ioana